Good morning. Hello. How are you? #1140
Jonathan Haidt brouhaha, donating the farm house to the fire department, Man Monday,
Good morning! Hello! Greetings once again from Somerville, MA. To recap, we have rented the apartment downstairs from Sean and Jussi and visit regularly now. It is exciting. If you ever need a place to stay in the Boston area, drop a line.
Jane is leaning up against me it is very cute. She is wearing a purple dress with black leggings that have white hearts on them. She had a really good poop last night, just epic. She did not brush her teeth this morning, but she brushed them last night, so that was a win. She was unimpressed with my eggs this morning, but that is fair, since I admittedly burned them. Well, not burned, but they were crispy on one side. The way *I* like them. Live for yourself once in a while.
She is playing a Lego racing game on Emma’s Nintendo Switch. Because I am a great dad and I am terrible about screens an it is fine. I believe this firmly, just like I believe that Jonathan Haidt is not incorrect in saying that social media is terrible for children. In case you’ve been spared from this little corner of internet drama, there is a new book out by this dude. People do not like this dude. They think his books are unscientific and pop culutry. His thesis is that the transition from unsupervised play to supervised play, in tandem with the rise of screen use has lead to a pandemic of depression in our teenagers. There is, to be clear, a pandemic of sadness in our teenagers. There is, to be clear, a strong correlation between these two. Haidt also says that there are lots of studies supporting the thesis that it is more than a correlation.
Other respected researchers, by contrast, say there is no such correlation. They both put forth a lot of studies supporting their position. My half-assed digging into this shows me that Haidt is putting forth a lot more studies, but it has definitely descended into that area where normies like me kinda go “oh the scientists are arguing so I guess I’ll just believe what I want.”
I am inordinately fascinated with this online debate because I simply cannot fathom that anyone would disagree with this thesis. But, then, I am trying to check my own biases, and my deferring to unscientific things like “common sense” and “what is sitting in front of my own eyes.” But, then, I freakin’ ran trust and safety at a major online platform that was verrrry popular with teens and I saw all the stalking and revenge porn and abuse these kids suffered, so, you know. Is that my “bias” or is that my “expertise.”
And, of course, there are challenges with study methodologies in general in this realm, something I know a bit about since sociological studies suffer from many of the same endogeneity challenges as economics studies, an area I do know more about. Plus I used the word “endogeneity” so clearly I am smart. Though I misspelled it. Ha ha the joke is on you.
It’s all very confusing because I deeply respect one of the researchers who is saying that there is no evidence to support Haidt’s thesis. But this is somewhat stunning to me since I have read her work and maybe I’m an idiot or something, I guess I am, because I feel like her own work certainly does not contradict this thesis, at the very least, and certain readings of it could support the thesis.
I also find it weird that this reporter, that I used to be good friends with, who has received so, so many death threats on the internet as a consequence of her reporting, and has spoken vocally about how much she has suffered at the hands of internet trolls, is so vocally opposed to Haidt’s thesis. I am genuinely stumped, as it seems like she of all people would certainly understand why social media might be harming a lot of people.
I am left thinking that this whole online debate is secretly a proxy battle about something else: about just not liking the guy? About secret political ramifications of the thesis? About being annoyed at pop science in general? I do not know. But I can’t shake the feeling something deeper is going on here. Something that is more about the larger picture of “what people might think” and not “the science.”
But maybe I am wrong.
I do not like feeling I am outside it though.
Weird world we live in.
I think one thing I believe is that “believing in the science” is not contrary to “thinking these studies are probably bullshit.” I think this springs from my economics background since, well, I am sorry to tell you this, but most economics is bullshit. All sciences are young, but the social sciences are even younger. If we posit that astronomy began with, say, Ptolomy, and the social sciences began with, say, Mirabeau in the late 1700’s (pick your own dates for either, the point stands), well, then, the social sciences would be about 1600 years behind astronomy and such. And then, well, let’s think back to the state of astronomy in, say, 500 AD. Yeah. A healthy dose of skepticism is still warranted, in my view.
So, yeah, I think screen time is probably terrible for kids but also I am completely letting my daughter play her switch right now and this is not hypocritical because (and I am admittedly shining my light on a slightly different facet of the topic here), surprise: not all screen time is the same.
I am not going to link to anything in this musing because I don’t want to encourage you to dive too deep into this very unsatisfying and kind of sad rabbit hole.
In more important news, the hand soap in this apartment’s bathroom is “floral citrus” and I have been walking around for three days convinced there is some potpourri hiding in this apartment and it has been driving me crazy. I need to get a new soap.
Last night Emma went out for dinner with a lady friend so I stayed in and did Jane bedtime but then Sean, Richard and I had Man Monday which was just grest. Thai food and a re-watch of Terminator 2, which, boy, I did not remember a lot of that movie. Also isn’t Robert Patrick brothers with one of the dudes in Filter, am I remembering that right? I am not going to Google this, I am lazy.
Tonight we go see Olivia Rodrigo and Chappell Roan and I am very excited but we will talk about that tomorrow.
Over at the farm-someday-to-be-a-boat-and-rv-storage-facility, we have invited the local SWAT team and fire department to use the old farmhouse for training. We gotta get rid of it anyway. So the SWAT team is going to break into it three or four times, and then the fire department is going to burn it down three or four times. I don’t especially love SWAT teams and am somewhat surprised to learn we have one in rural NC, but I do very much like having the county government and local services like us, and why not. My partner was telling me about how when he learned to use one of those door rams to break down doors, they had no actual doors to train on, just thwacking at a 2x4, so, you know, I suppose it'd be better if all of these people knew what they were doing.
Plus: Fire. Ooo pretty.
Oh my god, Jane is so snuggly it is so cute. Jane do you have anything you want to say this morning to my readers?
Silence.
Absorbed in her game.
Today’s Media of the Day is “Love is Embarrassing” by Olivia Rodrigo because it is the earworm of the week and I am very excited about tonight.
Talk to you tomorrow!